IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zib/zbnmsp/v1y2017i1p33-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lincomycin and tetracycline resistance in poultry. Review

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammad Jamal

    (Institute of Pharmacy, Physiology & Pharmacology,University of Agriculture, 38040 Faisalabad, Pakistan)

  • Munazza shareef

    (Institute of Pharmacy, Physiology & Pharmacology,University of Agriculture, 38040 Faisalabad, Pakistan)

  • Sanaullah Sajid

    (Institute of Microbiology, Faculty of veterinary science, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan)

Abstract

Antimicrobial agents are the most valuable means available for treating bacterial infections. Lincomycin and tetracycline are common brand having antibacterial activity. It is considered to be a cost-effective drugs because of its low cost, good activity against pathogenic anaerobic bacteria, favorable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics. Antibiotic in the animal feed as growth promoters are primarily source of antibiotic resistance and stress factor for gut epithelium. Current studies will elaborate the advances in understanding toxicity induce by tetracycline and lincomycin on mucosal layer of gut of broiler. Following parameters such feed intake, weight gain and feed conversion ratio were studied on weekly basis which show FCR of the lincomycin group was greater as compared to tetracycline group and control group minimum FCR was found in tetracycline group. ND and IBD (New castle disease and Infectious bursal disease) titer was also affected.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammad Jamal & Munazza shareef & Sanaullah Sajid, 2017. "Lincomycin and tetracycline resistance in poultry. Review," Matrix Science Pharma (MSP), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 33-38, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:zib:zbnmsp:v:1:y:2017:i:1:p:33-38
    DOI: 10.26480/msp.01.2017.33.38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://matrixscpharma.com/download/714/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.26480/msp.01.2017.33.38?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ramanan Laxminarayan & Thomas Van Boeckel & Aude Teillant, 2015. "The Economic Costs of Withdrawing Antimicrobial Growth Promoters from the Livestock Sector," OECD Food, Agriculture and Fisheries Papers 78, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Delmond, Anthony R. & Ahmed, Haseeb, 2021. "Optimal Antimicrobial Use under Countervailing Externalities," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 46(3), September.
    2. Ahmed, S. Amer & Baris, Enis & Go, Delfin S & Lofgren, Hans & Osorio Rodarte, Israel & Thierfelder, Karen, 2017. "Assessing the Global Economic and Poverty Effects of Antimicrobial Resistance," Conference papers 332903, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    3. Ahmed, Syud Amer & Barış, Enis & Go, Delfin S. & Lofgren, Hans & Osorio-Rodarte, Israel & Thierfelder, Karen, 2018. "Assessing the global poverty effects of antimicrobial resistance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 148-160.
    4. Dubois, Pierre & Gokkoca, Gokce, 2023. "Antibiotic Demand in the Presence of Antimicrobial Resistance," TSE Working Papers 23-1457, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Joy Igbafe & Agnes Kilonzo-Nthenge & Samuel N. Nahashon & Abdullah Ibn Mafiz & Maureen Nzomo, 2020. "Probiotics and Antimicrobial Effect of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum , Saccharomyces cerevisiae , and Bifidobacterium longum against Common Foodborne Pathogens in Poultry," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-13, August.
    6. Cheng Zhao & Yu Wang & Ranya Mulchandani & Thomas P. Van Boeckel, 2024. "Global surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in food animals using priority drugs maps," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-10, December.
    7. Małgorzata Czatzkowska & Izabela Wolak & Monika Harnisz & Ewa Korzeniewska, 2022. "Impact of Anthropogenic Activities on the Dissemination of ARGs in the Environment—A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-29, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zib:zbnmsp:v:1:y:2017:i:1:p:33-38. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Zibeline International Publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://matrixscpharma.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.